#2876
Posted: 7/6/07 at 2:02pm
I think Jon Bon Jovi is wonderfully sexy, but he looks far too old for the role. There's no set age, but it wouldn't seem realistic to have someone who looks 40+ as this youthful, rash explorer. Also, as much as I love Sherie Rene Scott, I don't believe she'd work in a movie version at all. She's not unattractive, but she's not the cute, petite type that would be almost necessary for Amneris on film. And again, although there's no set age for her character, why wouldn't Amneris be married off before turning Sherie's age? The stage is so much less limiting.
Weirdly enough, I was talking about the possibility of an Aida movie last night with Craww, and we agreed that it would either probably be awful or deemed too expensive to actually film (if cast with Broadway stars). On a personal level, I'm against casting blockbuster names in the roles, but I also can't really blame Disney. Look what happened with Rent when they tried casting the talented original stars again - it's probably not the only reason why Rent flopped (financially speaking), but it would have been more likely to do well with a star-studded cast. I have to agree that casting Adam in the romantic male lead role opposite Beyonce seems completely unrealistic. His age wouldn't bother me as I think he can pass for around 30 with the proper hair and makeup, but can you honestly imagine Disney advertising a movie with "Beyonce and Adam Pascal"? Not that they'd necessarily go about it in that way, but I'm not seeing it. Also, keep in mind that some might still associate him with the failure of Rent. If they're looking for a blockbuster musical, why would they cast the virtually unknown guy who was the romantic lead in another musical that flopped? It's nice to dream, but no.
I agree with Emcee about the issue of aesthetics. The pro to casting Hollywood stars in the roles is that they'd have a larger budget, although of course who knows if there will be competent people on the other end. Unfortunately, casting huge stars in all of the roles makes me think that the quality of the film will probably be compromised in other ways. It's a catch-22.
Weirdly enough, I was talking about the possibility of an Aida movie last night with Craww, and we agreed that it would either probably be awful or deemed too expensive to actually film (if cast with Broadway stars). On a personal level, I'm against casting blockbuster names in the roles, but I also can't really blame Disney. Look what happened with Rent when they tried casting the talented original stars again - it's probably not the only reason why Rent flopped (financially speaking), but it would have been more likely to do well with a star-studded cast. I have to agree that casting Adam in the romantic male lead role opposite Beyonce seems completely unrealistic. His age wouldn't bother me as I think he can pass for around 30 with the proper hair and makeup, but can you honestly imagine Disney advertising a movie with "Beyonce and Adam Pascal"? Not that they'd necessarily go about it in that way, but I'm not seeing it. Also, keep in mind that some might still associate him with the failure of Rent. If they're looking for a blockbuster musical, why would they cast the virtually unknown guy who was the romantic lead in another musical that flopped? It's nice to dream, but no.
I agree with Emcee about the issue of aesthetics. The pro to casting Hollywood stars in the roles is that they'd have a larger budget, although of course who knows if there will be competent people on the other end. Unfortunately, casting huge stars in all of the roles makes me think that the quality of the film will probably be compromised in other ways. It's a catch-22.
Updated On: 7/6/07 at 02:02 PM
And it's not really *pain* afterwards, it's just soreness, like when you first get your ears pierced, or what it feels like when you skin your knee.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
